Latest Cases Case Lookup Research Notebook LegislationSoon BriefsSoon

Kometer v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 131 — BarristerAI

Kometer v The State of Western Australia

[2005] WASCA 131

Western Australia Court of Appeal12 July 2005

View on AustLII View on JADE Download

More

View on AustLII View on JADE Download

Judges

Malcolm CJ, Roberts-smith JA, Mclure JA

Headnote

No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.

Generate the headnote

Free trial · no card required

Case Details

Citation[2005] WASCA 131

CourtWASCA

JurisdictionWa

Decision Date12 July 2005

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

Start free trial

No card · cancel anytime

Judgment

Judges

Malcolm CJ · Roberts-smith JA · Mclure JA

Subsequent Judicial Consideration6›

Cases that have considered Kometer v The State of Western Australia

Referred to (6)

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- HUSSIAN [2020] WASCA 186 PUREAU -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [2017] WASCA 115 NICOLAIDES -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [2012] WASCA 199 THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- CHEESEMAN [2011] WASCA 15 THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- TIK [2009] WASCA 122

Judicial Consideration (Chronological)

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- HUSSIAN [2020] WASCA 186Referred to

PUREAU -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [2017] WASCA 115Referred to

NICOLAIDES -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [2012] WASCA 199Referred to

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- CHEESEMAN [2011] WASCA 15Referred to

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA -v- TIK [2009] WASCA 122Referred to

Mjh v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 167Referred to

The Hindmarsh-Petrie test for vicarious sub-tortfeasor liability requires the principal to have had actual or constructive knowledge of the sub-tortfeasor's propensity to act unlawfully in the course of the engagement, and that the engagement created the occasion for the wrongful conduct

The Hindmarsh-Petrie test for vicarious sub-tortfeasor liability requires the principal to have had actual or constructive knowledge of the sub-tortfeasor's propensity to act unlawfully in the course of the engagement, and that the engagement created the occasion for the wrongful conduct.

Kometer v The State of Western Australia at [30]

Where a party seeks to rely upon an estoppel by convention, the party must demonstrate that the common assumption was shared by both parties and that it would be unconscionable to permit departure from it

Where a party seeks to rely upon an estoppel by convention, the party must demonstrate that the common assumption was shared by both parties and that it would be unconscionable to permit departure from it.

Kometer v The State of Western Australia at [37]